What Follows is the Meat…
To Get the Culture Right…
1) Trust in Truth
... 2) Realize that you have nothing to fear from truth. Understanding, accepting, and knowing how to effectively deal with reality are crucial for achieving success. Having truth on your side is extremely powerful. While the truth itself may be scary—you have a weakness, you have a deadly disease, etc.—knowing the truth will allow you to deal with your situation better. Being truthful, and letting others be truthful with you, allows you to explore your own thoughts and exposes you to the feedback that is essential for your learning. Being truthful is an extension of your freedom to be you; people who are one way on the inside and another on the outside become conflicted and often lose touch with their own values. It’s difficult for them to be happy, and almost impossible for them to be at their best. While the first-order effects of being radically truthful might not be desirable, the second- and third-order effects are great.
... 2) 你要知道，真相没什么可怕的。理解、接受、并了解如何能够有效处理现实问题，这对于取得成功而言至关重要。站在真相一边，就最有说服力。当然，有时真相本身可能会让人惧怕，比如，你暴露了一个弱点或者甚至是身患绝症，而了解真相却能让你更从容地处理事情。对自己坦诚、对他人坦诚，让别人也对自己坦诚，才能更好地了解自己的想法，获得他人的反馈，从而学到知识。诚实，同时也是做自己的自由的延伸。表里不一的人往往会自相矛盾，也容易丢失自己的价值观。他们不易开心，更不可能展现出自己最好的一面。尽管从一级效应的角度来看，过于诚实未免使人难以接受，但是从二、三级效应的角度而言，这样做却收效可观。
- Do you agree with this?
... 3) Create an environment in which everyone has the right to understand what makes sense and no one has the right to hold a critical opinion without speaking up about it.
... 3) 创造这样一种氛围：人人都有权理解合理之事，如果任何人有意见，都拥有开诚布公地表达自己想法的环境。。
... 4) Be extremely open. Openness leads to truth and trust. Being open about what you dislike is especially important, because things you don’t like need to be changed or resolved. Discuss your issues until you are in synch or until you understand each other’s positions and can determine what should be done. As someone I worked with once explained, “It’s simple - just don’t filter.” The main reason Bridgewater performs well is that all people here have the power to speak openly and equally and because their views are judged on the merits of what they are saying. Through that extreme openness and a meritocracy of thought, we identify and solve problems better. Since we know we can rely on honesty, we succeed more and we ultimately become closer, and since we succeed and are close, we are more committed to this mission and to each other. It is a self-reinforcing, virtuous cycle.
... 4) 要极为坦诚。坦诚能够揭示真相，增强互信。对于自己不喜欢的事情开诚布公尤为重要，因为你必须改变或彻底解决这些你不喜欢的事情。各抒己见，直到达成一致，或者直到充分理解彼此的处境，找到解决方案。一位曾经的同事说过，“这其实很简单，（表达观点时）不作任何过滤就行了。”桥水联合基金的成功经验之一就是公司所有人都能够以开放的、平等的方式进行沟通，他们的观点会得到客观公正的对待。遵循极致坦诚和观点至上的原则，我们才能够更好的发现并解决问题。对诚实的依赖，使我们更频繁地取得成功，彼此变得更加亲密。而因为这些成功和亲密，我们能更坚定地投入到事业与彼此之中。这是一个自我增强的过程，一个良性循环。
- Do you agree with this?
... 5) Have integrity and demand it from others. Integrity comes from the Latin word integer,meaning “one.” People who are one way on the inside and another way outside lack integrity; they have duality.
... 5) 为人正直，要求别人也保持正直。英文中的正直（integrity）一词来源于拉丁语的整体（integer）一词，含有唯一性。表里不一的人缺少唯一性，他们具有两面性。
The second- and third-order effects of having integrity and avoiding duality are great. Thinking solely about what’s accurate instead of how it is perceived helps you to be more focused on important things. It helps you sort the people you are around and the environments you are in. It improves the organization’s efficiency and camaraderie because the secret things that people think and don't say to each other drive resentment and key issues underground and don’t lead to improvement. Having nothing to hide relieves stress. It also builds trust. For these reasons:
5a) Never say anything about a person you wouldn’t say to them directly, and don’t try people without accusing them to their face. Badmouthing people behind their backs shows a serious lack of integrity and is counterproductive. It doesn’t yield any beneficial change, and it subverts both the people you are badmouthing and the environment as a whole. Next to being dishonest, it is the worst thing you can do at Bridgewater. Criticism is both welcomed and encouraged at Bridgewater, so there is no good reason to talk behind people’s backs. You need to follow this policy to an extreme degree. For example, managers should not talk about people who work for them without those people being in the room. If you talk behind people’s backs at Bridgewater you are called a slimy weasel.
5b) Don’t let “loyalty” stand in the way of truth and openness. In some companies, employees hide their employer’s mistakes, and employers do the same in return. In these places, openly expressing your concerns is considered disloyal, and discouraged. Because it prevents people from bringing their mistakes and weaknesses to the surface and because it encourages deception and eliminates the subordinates’ right of appeal, unhealthy loyalty stands in the way of improvement. I believe in a truer, healthier form of loyalty, which does the opposite. Healthy loyalty fosters improvement through openly addressing mistakes and weaknesses. The more people are open about their challenges, the more helpful others can be. In an environment in which mistakes and weaknesses are dealt with frankly, those who face their challenges have the most admirable character. By contrast, when mistakes and weaknesses are hidden, unhealthy character is legitimized.
... 6) Be radically transparent. Provide people with as much exposure as possible to what’s going on around them. Allowing people direct access lets them form their own views and greatly enhances accuracy and the pursuit of truth. Winston Churchill said, “There is no worse course in leadership than to hold out false hopes soon to be swept away.” The candid question-and-answer process allows people to probe your thinking. You can then modify your thinking to get at the best possible answer, reinforcing your confidence that you’re on the best possible path.
6a) Record almost all meetings and share them with all relevant people. Provide tapes of all meetings that don’t contain confidential information to enhance transparency. Of course, there are some times when privacy is required. If someone gives you confidential information, keep it confidential until you have permission to disclose it.
... 7) Don’t tolerate dishonesty. People typically aren’t totally honest, which stands in the way of progress, so don’t tolerate this. There’s an adjustment process at Bridgewater in which one learns to be completely honest and expect the same from others. Increasingly you engage in logical, unemotional discussions in pursuit of truth in which criticisms are not viewed as attacks, but as explorations of possible sources of problems.
... 7) 对不诚实零容忍。无法做到完全诚实是人之本性，但这却阻碍了人取得进步，因此，不该容忍不诚实的现象。在桥水，我们拥有一项调整程序，在此程序中，人们学习该如何完全诚实，并期待他人对自己坦诚相见。你会逐步参与到理智的、不带感情色彩的讨论当中。这些讨论旨在追求真相，讨论过程中的批评不会被看作是人身攻击，而会被当成探寻问题之源的途径。
7a) Don’t believe it when someone caught being dishonest says they have seen the light and will never do that sort of thing again. Chances are they will. The cost of keeping someone around who has been dishonest is likely to be higher than any benefits.
... 8) Create a Culture in Which It Is OK to Make Mistakes but Unacceptable Not to Identify, Analyze, and Learn From Them
... 9) Recognize that effective, innovative thinkers are going to make mistakes and learn from them because it is a natural part of the innovation process.For every mistake that you learn from you will save thousands of similar mistakes in the future, so if you treat mistakes as learning opportunities that yield rapid improvements you should be excited by them. But if you treat them as bad things, you will make yourself and others miserable, and you won’t grow. Your work environment will be marked by petty back-biting and malevolent barbs rather than by a healthy, honest search for truth that leads to evolution and improvement. Because of this, the more mistakes you make and the more quality, honest diagnoses you have, the more rapid your progress will be. That’s not B.S. or just talk. That’s the reality of learning.50
... 9) 要意识到处事高效、具有创新思维的人都会犯错，从错误中吸取教训，这都是创新过程的自然组成部分。你每吃一堑，长一智，就能在未来避免犯数千次类似的错误。如果你将错误当做快速提升自我的学习机会，那么你就会对发现错误激动不已。如果你将他人向你指出的错误视为一件坏事，那么你不仅自己痛苦，指出错误的人也会痛苦，你更不会因为这个错误而得到成长。你的工作环境会充斥着小肚鸡肠和暗箭伤人，而缺乏健康的、诚实的对真相的探索。然而，只有通过这一探索过程才能实现成长和提升。基于此，你犯的错越多，你获得的高质量的诚实的诊断就越多，你就会进步得越快。这一过程不是简单的头脑风暴或者聊天，而是学习的本质所在。
Thomas Edison said about failure: “I have not failed. I’ve just found 10,000 ways that don’t work.” “I am not discouraged, because every wrong attempt discarded is another step forward.” “Results! Why, man, I have gotten a lot of results. I know several thousand things that won’t work.” “When I have fully decided that a result is worth getting I go ahead of it and make trial after trial until it comes.” “Many of life’s failures are men who did not realize how close they were to success when they gave up.”
A good book about this is Einstein’s Mistakes by Hans Ohanian.
... 10) Do not feel bad about your mistakes or those of others. Love them! Remember that 1) they are to be expected, 2) they’re the first and most essential part of the learning process, and 3) feeling bad about them will prevent you from getting better. People typically feel bad about mistakes because they think in a short-sighted way that mistakes reflect their badness or because they’re worried about being punished (or not being rewarded) . People also tend to get angry at those who make mistakes because in a short-sighted way they focus on the bad outcome rather than the educational, evolutionary process they’re a part of. That’s a real tragedy.
... 10) 不要为自己或别人犯的错而郁郁寡欢，要热爱这些错! 记住，1）错误是不可避免的；2）错误是学习过程中第一个也是最重要的一个环节；3）为犯错而懊恼会阻碍你的成长。人们总是对犯错耿耿于怀，这可能是因为人们短视地认为错误反映了他们的缺点，又或者他们担心会因此受到惩罚（或者无法获得奖励）。同时，人们会因为他人犯错而生气，因为从短视的角度来看，大家只会将注意力放在犯错带来的坏结果上，而没有看到错误的教育意义和其作为成长过程的一部分。这才是悲剧所在。
... 11) Observe the patterns of mistakes to see if they are a product of weaknesses. Connect the dots without ego barriers. If there is a pattern of mistakes, it probably signifies a weakness. Everyone has weaknesses. The fastest path to success is to know what they are and how to deal with them so that they don’t stand in your way. Weaknesses are due to deficiencies in learning or deficiencies in abilities. Deficiencies in learning can be rectified over time, though usually not quickly, while deficiencies in abilities are virtually impossible to change. Neither is a meaningful impediment to getting what you want if you accept it as a problem that can be designed around.
**... 11) 仔细观察所犯错误的模式，看看它们是不是⾃⾝缺陷所导致的。以不设自我障碍的方式回想过去的点点滴滴。如果有错误模式，它很可能意味着一种缺陷。每个人都有很多缺陷，最快的成功方式就是知道这些缺陷和如何处理这些缺陷，那么它们就不会阻挡你成功的路。缺陷来自于学习的不足或者能力的不足。学习的不足可以通过时间来改进，但是通常不会很快，然而能力的不足几乎不能改变。但是只要你认为缺陷是一个可以用新方法解决的问题，不论是学习缺陷还是能力缺陷都不会是一个阻碍你得到你想要的东西的有实际意义的障碍。
I once had a ski instructor who had taught Michael Jordan, the greatest basketball player of all time, how to ski. He explained that Jordan enjoyed his mistakes and got the most out of them. At the start of high school, Jordan was an unimpressive basketball player; he became a champion because he loved using his mistakes to improve. Yet despite Jordan’s example and the example of countless other successful people, it is far more common for people to allow ego to stand in the way of learning. Perhaps it’s because school learning overemphasizes the value of having the right answers and punishes wrong answers. Good school learners are often bad mistake-based learners because they are bothered by their mistakes. I particularly see this problem in recent graduates from the best colleges, who frequently shy away from exploring their own weaknesses. Remember that intelligent people who are open to recognizing and learning from their weaknesses substantially outperform people with the same abilities who aren’t similarly open.
... 12) Do not feel bad about your weaknesses or those of others. They are opportunities to improve. If you can solve the puzzle of what is causing them, you will get a gem - i.e., the ability to stop making them in the future. Everyone has weaknesses and can benefit from knowing about them. Don’t view explorations of weaknesses as attacks. A person who receives criticism - particularly if he tries to objectively consider if it’s true - is someone to be admired.
... 12) 不要因为自己或别人的缺点而感到糟糕。缺点意味着进步的机会。如果你能解决迷阵，就能获得一颗宝石，如果你能解决迷阵，就能获得一颗宝石，即获得了将来不再犯此类错误的能力。每个人都有缺点，也都能从了解自身缺点中受益。不要将寻找弱点的过程当作是对自身的攻击。一个从善如流的人能够接受批评，并客观判断批评是否客观，尤其值得别人的敬仰。
... 13) Don’t worry about looking good - worry about achieving your goals. Put your insecurities away and get on with achieving your goals.
... 13) 别老担心面子上过不过得去，而要担心是否能达成目标。克服安全感缺失，一心一意实现自己的目标。
To test if you are worrying too much about looking good, observe how you feel when you find out you’ve made a mistake or don’t know something. If you find yourself feeling bad, reflect - remind yourself that the most valuable comments are accurate criticisms. Imagine how silly and unproductive it would be if you thought your ski instructor was blaming you when he told you that you fell because you didn’t shift your weight properly. If a criticism is accurate, it is a good thing. You should appreciate it and try to learn from it.
... 14) Get over “blame” and “credit” and get on with “accurate” and “inaccurate.” When people hear, “You did XYZ wrong,” they have an instinctual reaction to figure out possible consequences or punishments rather than to try to understand how to improve. Remember that what has happened lies in the past and no longer matters, except as a method for learning how to be better in the future. Create an environment in which people understand that remarks such as “You handled that badly” are meant to be helpful (for the future) rather than punitive (for the past) . While people typically feel unhappy about blame and good about credit, that attitude gets everything backwards and can cause major problems. Worrying about “blame” and “credit” or “positive” and “negative” feedback impedes the iterative process essential to learning.
... 14) 别去管“责备”或“赞扬”，要去判断“精准”还是“不精准”。当人们听到别人说“这事你做错了”，大家的本能反应是担心后果，害怕惩罚，而不是去想办法改进。要记住，要记住，过去的事情已经过去，也不再重要，过去只能当作学习的参照，以便让自己在未来做的更好。努力创造这样一种环境，当听到有人说，“这件事你处理的很差劲”时，当事人应该看到这种评价是对未来的帮助，而不是对过去的惩罚。人们面对责备时总是闷闷不乐，而对赞扬总是沾沾自喜，这种处事态度于事无补，甚至会引发重大问题。纠结反馈是“责备”还是“赞扬”，是“积极”还是“消极”，只会阻碍学习必须的互动过程。
... 15) Don’t depersonalize mistakes. Identifying who made mistakes is essential to learning. It is also a test of whether a person will put improvement ahead of ego and whether he will fit into the Bridgewater culture. A common error is to say, “We didn’t handle this well” rather than “Harry didn’t handle this well.” This occurs when people are uncomfortable connecting specific mistakes to specific people because of ego sensitivities. This creates dysfunctional and dishonest organizations. Since individuals are the most important building blocks of any organization and since individuals are responsible for the ways things are done, the diagnosis must connect the mistake to the specific individual by name. Someone created the procedure that went wrong, or decided we should act according to that procedure, and ignoring that fact will slow our progress toward successfully dealing with the problem.
... 15) 错误归因要具体到个人。确定是谁犯了错误，对于学习而言至关重要。问责也是检验一个人是否能够将进步置于自我之上，检验他是否能够融入桥水的文化。人们会犯一个普遍的错误，我们总说，“这件事我们处理的不好”而不是“哈利这件事处理的不好”。将具体的错误归因到具体的人身上会有碍自尊，让人难堪。但是如果没有个人追责制，只会导致公司运营紊乱，诚信缺失。每一个人都是组织最重要的构建模块，因为每个人都对组织的运行方式负责。因此针对问题的诊断必须将错误具体到个人。是谁设立了出问题的流程，又是谁决定我们应该按此流程办事，忽视个人归责将拖累我们成功处理问题的步伐。
... 16) Write down your weaknesses and the weaknesses of others to help remember and acknowledge them. It’s unhealthy to hide them because if you hide them, it will slow your progress towards successfully dealing with them. Conversely, if you don’t want them and you stare at them, you will inevitably evolve past them.
... 16) 写下你和别人的缺点，帮助彼此牢记并承认这些缺点。隐藏缺点是不健康的，因为隐藏只会拖累成功解决问题的步伐。相反，如果你不想要这些缺点，对它们横眉冷对，最终也会逐渐克服它们。
... 17) When you experience pain, remember to reflect. You can convert the “pain” of seeing your mistakes and weaknesses into pleasure. If there is only one piece of advice I can get you to remember it is this one. Calm yourself down and think about what is causing your psychological pain. Ask other objective, believable parties for their help to figure it out. Find out what is true. Don’t let ego barriers stand in your way. Remember that pains that come from seeing mistakes and weaknesses are “growing pains” that you learn from.51 Don’t rush through them. Stay in them and explore them because that will help build the foundation for improvement. It is widely recognized that 1) changing your deep-seated, harmful behavior is very difficult yet necessary for improvement and 2) doing this generally requires a deeply felt recognition of the connection between your harmful behavior and the pain it causes. Psychologists call this “hitting bottom.” Embracing your failures is the first step toward genuine improvement; it is also why “confession” precedes forgiveness in many societies.52 If you keep doing this you will learn to improve and feel the pleasures of it.
... 17) 若因犯了错而感到痛苦，记住要进行反思。若因犯错后而感到痛苦，记住要习惯反思。你有把发现自己的错误和缺点后的痛苦转化成快乐的自由，你有资格善用它，这是你的权利，如果你只能记住一条建议，那么我希望是这一条。冷静思考痛苦的心理原因，向客观、可信的他人求证，最终找到真相。不要让自我成为进步的拦路虎。记住，那些因看到了错误或缺点而感到的痛苦，是成长的痛苦，是可以从中受益的痛苦。不要试图匆忙结束这种痛苦，而应该沉浸在其中，探索痛苦，因为这样做能够为提升自我打好基础。众所周知，1）改变自己深层次的有害行为是非常困难的，但这是取得进步的必由之路；2）要想成功，还需要深刻认识到有害行为和其所带来的痛苦之间的联系。心理学家将这一过程称之为“探底”。拥抱失败是通向真正进步的第一步，这也是为什么在整个社会迭代的进程中，都凸显出一个相同的真理，即要先坦白，才能获得宽恕。如此往复，你就能学会提升自我，并从中获得快乐。
If you recognize short-term failure as a step toward long-term success, which it really is if you learn from it, you won’t be afraid of it or made uncomfortable by it and you will approach all of your experiences as learning experiences, even the most difficult ones.
Ego often stands in the way of acknowledging your weaknesses (which is the essential first step in overcoming them) , like being afraid to ask a question because people might think you’re stupid because you don’t know something. Yet acknowledging those weaknesses (e.g., “I know I‘m a dumb shit, but I’d just like to know…”) helps you move beyond ego toward learning and improving.
... 18) Be self-reflective and make sure your people are self-reflective. This quality differentiates those who evolve fast from those who don’t. When there is pain, the animal instinct is ‘fight or flight’ (i.e., to either strike back or run away) - reflect instead. When you can calm yourself down, thinking about the dilemma that is causing you pain will bring you to a higher level and enlighten you, leading to progress. That is because the pain you are feeling is due to something being at odds - maybe it’s you encountering reality, such as the death of a friend, and not being able to accept it. If when you are calm, you can think clearly about what things are at odds, you will learn more about what reality is like and how to better deal with it. It really will produce progress. If, on the other hand, the pain causes you to tense-up, not think, feel sorry for yourself, and blame others, it will be a very bad experience. So, when you are in pain, try to remember: Pain + Reflection = Progress. It’s pretty easy to determine whether a person is reflective or deflective: self-reflective people openly and objectively look at themselves while deflective people don’t.
... 18) 要经常自我反思，也确保你身边的朋友们也都懂得自我反思。这一特质因人而异，有的人成长得快，有的人慢。当人感受到痛苦的时候，其动物本性就是“战斗还是逃跑”，而此时，你需要去反思。使自己冷静下来，反思自己痛苦的根源将有助于从更高层次启发自我，取得进步。因为你感觉到的痛苦是由生活中的变数带来的，可能是你所面临的现实，比如好友的逝去，使你一时无法接受。当你平静下来，你可以更清晰地思索生活中的变数，更好地了解现实，从而更好处理生活事物，这样做真的裨益良多。而如果痛苦让你紧张，无法思考，陷入懊丧，责备他人，那么这将是一段非常糟糕的经历。所以，当你经历痛苦的时候，请记住：痛苦+反思=进步。判断一个人是否会反思很简单，经常自省的人能够开放、客观地看待自己，而不会反思的人则反之。
... 19) Teach and reinforce the merits of mistake-based learning. We must bring mistakes into the open and analyze them objectively, so managers need to foster a culture that makes this normal and penalizes suppressing or covering up mistakes. Probably the worst mistake anyone can make at Bridgewater is not facing up to mistakes - i.e., hiding rather than highlighting them. Highlighting them, diagnosing them, thinking about what should be done differently in the future, and then adding that new knowledge to the procedures manual are all essential to our improvement.
... 19) 树立从错误中吸取教训的观念，传递并强化这个观念。我们必须坦诚对待错误，客观分析错误。管理者应该努力营造一种文化，使从错误中吸取教训的学习方式常规化，惩罚打压或掩盖错误的行为。在桥水，一个人所能犯的最糟糕的错误就是不能直面错误，就是躲避错误而不是强调错误。强调错误，诊断错误，思考未来的改进方案，将这些吸取的新知识加入到流程手册中，所以这些都是取得进步的必要步骤。
19a) The most valuable tool we have for this is the issues log (explained fully later) , which is aimed at identifying and learning from mistakes. Using this tool is mandatory because we believe that enforcing this behavior is far better than leaving it optional.
... 20) Constantly Get in Synch
... 21) Constantly get in synch about what is true and what to do about it. Getting in synch helps you achieve better answers through considering alternative viewpoints. It can take the forms of asking, debating, discussing, and teaching how things should be done. Sometimes it is to make our views on our strengths, weaknesses, and values transparent in order to reach the understanding that helps us move forward. Sometimes it is to be clear about who will do what and the game plan for handling responsibilities. So this process can be both a means of finding the best answers and pushing them ahead. Quality conversations about what is true and what should be done will produce better outcomes and many fewer misunderstandings in the future.
... 21) 要在去伪存真和解决方案上争取意见统一。争取意见统一能够使你通过参考不同意见从而获得更好的解决方案。形式可以是多种多样的，比如提问、辩论、讨论或者教别人如何解决问题。有时，我们需要公开对自己长处、短处、价值观的看法，以此达成谅解，帮助我们前行。有时，我们需要明确分工，对于处理任务有一个计划方案。因此，这一流程既能找到最优方案，又能敦促解决方案的实施。关于去伪存真和解决方案的高质量进行沟通，能够带来更优产出，也会在未来避免很多误解。
... 22) Talk about “Is it true?” and “Does it make sense?” In a culture that values both independent thinking and innovation, each individual has both the right and the obligation to ensure that what they do, and what we collectively do, in pursuit of excellence, makes sense to them. So, get in synch about these things.
... 22) 养成对“这是对的么？”和“这事有意义么？”这两个问题反复讨论的习惯。在我们的文化里，独立思考和创新思维受到同样的重视。在追求卓越的过程中，确保保个人做的事和集体做的事都有意义，这既是每个人的权利也是每个人的义务。因此，我们需要就这些问题争取意见统一。
...23) Fight for right. Discuss or debate important issues with the right relevant parties in an open-minded way until the best answers are determined. This process will maximize learning and mutual understanding. Thrash it out to get to the best answer.
... 23) 认为对的事情，要据理力争。与合适的相关方本着开放的态度讨论或辩论重要问题直到确定最佳方案。这一过程能够将学习效果和互相理解最大化。据理力争，直到获得最佳方案。
... 24) Be assertive and open-minded at the same time. Just try to find out what is true.Don’t try to ‘win’ the argument. Finding out that you are wrong is even more valuable than being right, because you are learning.
24a) Ask yourself whether you have earned the right to have an opinion. Opinions are easy to produce, so bad ones abound. Knowing that you don’t know something is nearly as valuable as knowing it. The worst situation is thinking you know something when you don’t.
24a) 在想表达意见的时候，先问问自己，是否拥有发表观点的权利。 观点来之容易，错误的观点则不可避免。知道自己无知与知识本身的价值相等，即便他们对讨论的话题知之甚少。
24b) Recognize that you always have the right to have and ask questions.
24c) Distinguish open-minded people from closed-minded people. Open- minded people seek to learn by asking questions; they realize that what they know is little in relation to what there is to know and recognize that they might be wrong. Closed- minded people always tell you what they know, even if they know hardly anything about the subject being discussed. They are typically made uncomfortable by being around those who know a lot more about a subject, unlike open-minded people who are thrilled by such company.
24c) 区分思想开放的人和思想保守的人。 思想开放的人通过问问题来学习，他们知道自己所知与未知相比实在微不足道，也承认自己可能会犯错。思想保守的人会不停向你诉说他们的见解，即便他们对讨论的话题一无所知。思想保守的人通常会因为身处一群专业人士之中感到不安，而思想开放的人则最见贤思齐，不亦乐乎。
24d) Don’t have anything to do with closed- minded, inexperienced people. They won’t do you any good and there’s no helping them until they open their minds, so they will waste your time in the meantime. If you must deal with them, the first thing you have to do is open their minds. Being open-minded is far more important than being bright or smart.
24e) Be wary of the arrogant intellectual who comments from the stands without having played on the field. And avoid that trap yourself.
24e) 对那些夸夸其谈的纸上谈兵之人要尤为警惕。 不要被他们忽悠。
24f) Watch out for people who think it’s embarrassing not to know. They’re dangerous.
... 25) Make sure responsible parties are open-minded about the questions and comments of others. They are required to explain the thinking behind a decision openly and transparently so that all can understand and assess it. Further, in the event of disagreement, an appeal should be made to either the manager’s boss or an agreed- upon, knowledgeable group of others, generally including people more believable than and senior to the decision-maker. The person(s) resolving the dispute must do this objectively and fairly; otherwise our system will fail at maintaining its meritocracy of ideas.
... 25) 确保主要负责人对于他人提出的问题与评论都是持开放态度的。 他们必须本着开放和透明的精神向大家解释决策背后的深思熟虑，以便让每个人都能够理解并评估决策。。此外，当出现意见不合时，应该向其他比决策者更权威的人士提出申诉，包括决策者的上级、其他约定方和专业小组。相关人员必须以客观、公正的态度来解决纠纷，否则我们的系统将无法保证观点至上原则的执行。
... 26) Recognize that conflicts are essential for great relationships because they are the means by which people determine whether their principles are aligned and resolve their differences. I believe that in all relationships, including the most treasured ones, 1) there are principles and values each person has that must be in synch for the relationship to be successful and 2) there must be give and take. I believe there is always a kind of negotiation or debate between people based on principles and mutual consideration. What you learn about each other via that “negotiation” either draws you together or drives you apart. If your principles are aligned and you can work out your differences via a process of give and take, you will draw closer together. If not, you will move apart. It is through such open discussion, especially when it comes to contentious issues, that people can make sure there are no misunderstandings. If that open discussion of differences doesn’t happen on an ongoing basis, the gaps in perspectives will widen until inevitably there is a major clash. Ironically, people who suppress the mini-confrontations for fear of conflict tend to have huge conflicts later, which can lead to separation, precisely because they let minor problems fester. On the other hand, people who address the mini-conflicts head-on in order to straighten things out tend to have the great, long-lasting relationships. That’s why I believe people should feel free to say whatever they really think.
... 26) 要意识到，冲突对于建立重要关系是大有裨益的，因为通过冲突人们才能确定对方的原则是否与自己一致，便于化解分歧。我相信在所有的关系之中，包括那些最令人珍视的关系，1）为了建立良好的关系，有一些原则和价值观是必须达成一致的；2）必须有人给予，有人接受。人们总会基于原则和互谅进行一些协商和辩论。通过协商，增进了对彼此的了解，而这种了解可以让双方更加亲密，也可能让你们分道扬镳。如果你们的原则一致，通过给予与接受，你们彼此磨合，则会更加亲密。反之，你们将渐行渐远。只有通过这种自由讨论，尤其是针对极具争议话题的讨论，相关方才能确保他们不存在误解。如果这种针对彼此之间差异性的讨论不是持续进行的，那么观点上的间隙便会持续扩大直至出现重大冲突。令人感到讽刺的是，那些为避免冲突而试图压制小小不合的人，往往会在之后经受更大的冲突，最终可能分崩离析。而这一结果正是由于他们让小问题不断恶化造成的。与此相反，如果大家能够正视小矛盾，不断将关系捋顺，则更有可能获得健康、长久的关系。因此，我认为人们应该毫无保留地勇敢说出自己的真实想法。
26a) Expect more open-minded disagreements at Bridgewater than at most other firms.They fuel the learning that helps us be at our best. Sometimes when there are disagreements, people get angry. But you should remind them that the management at most other companies doesn’t welcome disagreement or encourage open debate. As a result, there is less of both. So instead of getting angry, they should welcome the fact that disagreements and open debate are encouraged here.
26b) There is giant untapped potential in disagreement, especially if the disagreement is between two or more thoughtful people - yet most people either avoid it or they make it an unproductive fight. That’s tragic.
Most people have a tough time disagreeing about the most trivial things, like whether they like the same restaurant, yet are happy to confidently express their opinions, however badly they are formed, if they get them out first. As a result, there is an overabundance of confident bad opinions around and very few thoughtful conclusions arising from learning from each other. It is common for conversations to be exchanges of sentences that begin “I think…” followed by their conclusions, and both parties believing that they had a good conversation and feeling good about each other, even though nothing was accomplished. If most people did the opposite—i.e., if they sought out and open-mindedly explored their disagreements—it would produce a radical increase in learning, and the world would be a much better place.
... 27) Know when to stop debating and move on to agreeing about what should be done. I have seen people who agree on the major issues waste hours arguing over details. It’s more important to do big things well than to do small things perfectly. Be wary of bogging down amid minor issues at the expense of time devoted to solidifying important agreements.
... 27) 知道什么时候终止辩论，进而讨论一致的解决方案。 我见过太多人在大问题上能达成共识，却在细节上浪费过多的时间争执不休。与其将小事做到完美，不如将大事做好。谨防被琐碎之事拖累，牺牲掉本该投入到就大问题达成一致的时间。
27a) However, when people disagree on the importance of debating something, it should be debated. Operating otherwise would essentially give someone (typically the boss) a de facto veto right.
27a) 但是，当有人质疑就某事展开辩论的重要性时，辩论是有必要的。 辩论十分必要，否则无异于给了别人（尤其是上司）实际上的否决权。
27b) Recognize that “there are many good ways to skin a cat.” Your assessment of how responsible parties are doing their jobs should not be based on whether they’re doing it your way but whether they're doing it in a good way.
27c) For disagreements to have a positive effect, people evaluating an individual decision or decision -maker must view the issue within a broader context. For example, if the responsible party being challenged has a vision, and the decision under disagreement involves a small detail, evaluate the decision within the context of the broader vision. The ensuing discussion resulting from challenging someone’s decision will help people understand all the considerations behind it.
27c) 要利用分歧获得具有积极意义的成果，评估个人抉择或决策者的观点时需要从更广更高的角度来看问题。 例如，如果被质疑的责任主体有自己的远见，而在分歧之下的决策涉及细节问题，那么请在更大的背景之下审查该决策。质疑某人决策而引发的讨论将有助于人们了解决策背后的诸多考量。
27d) Distinguish between 1) idle complaints and 2) complaints that are meant to lead to improvement.
27d) 要区分两个概念：1）无用的抱怨 2）旨在实现改善的合理诉求。
... 28) Appreciate that open debate is not meant to create rule by referendum. It is meant to provide the decision-maker with alternative perspectives in anticipation of a better answer. It can also be used to enhance understanding of others’ views and abilities and, over time, assess whether someone should be assigned a responsibility. It doesn’t mean there can’t be some designs in which a group oversees a person. But that’s designed and embedded in the organizational structure, specifying the people responsible for oversight who are chosen because of their knowledge and judgment.
... 28) 赞赏自由辩论的讨论方式并不意味着要通过全体投票来制定规则。为获得最佳方案，本就应该为决策者提供更多的可选视角。自由辩论也能够增进对彼此观点和能力的了解，随着时间的推移，还可以检验一个人是否能担当重任。这并不意味着不能刻意规划让一个团队来监管一个人，但是这种规划是刻意置于组织架构之中的，需要说明的是，负责监管的人必须是因其知识与判断而被选定。
... 29) Evaluate whether an issue calls for debate, discussion, or teaching. Debate,discussion, and teaching are all ways of getting in synch, but they work differently and the approach you choose should reflect your goal and the relative believability of the people involved. Debate is generally among approximate equals; discussion is open-minded exploration among people of various levels of understanding; and teaching is between people of different levels of understanding.
... 29) 要评估事项是否需要辩论、讨论或传授。辩论、讨论和传授都是达成意见统一的方式，但是三者的运作方式不同，选择何种方式取决于你的目标和相关人员的理解能力。每个人在沟通前，都应该客观评估自己的专业程度与理解力，以保证沟通的效率。辩论一般应用于理解程度相等的人之间；讨论是不同理解程度人之间的自由探讨；而传授则是理解度高的人对理解度低的人的沟通方式。
29a) To avoid confusion, make clear which kind of conversation (debate, discussion, or teaching) you are having and recognize that the purpose is ultimately to get at truth, not to prove that someone is right or wrong.
29b) Communication aimed at getting the best answer should involve the most relevant people. Not everyone should randomly probe everyone else, because that’s an unproductive waste of time. People should consider their own levels of believability and understanding to assess if the probing makes sense. As a guide, the most relevant people are your managers, direct reports, and/or agreed experts. They are the most impacted by and most informed about the issues under discussion, and so they are the most important parties to be in synch with. If you can’t get in synch, you should escalate the disagreement.
29c) Communication aimed at educating or boosting cohesion should involve a broader set of people than would be needed if the aim were just getting the best answer. Less experienced, less believable people will be included. They may not be necessary to decide an issue, but if you aren’t in synch with them, that lack of understanding will likely undermine morale and the organization’s efficiency. In cases where you have people who are both not believable and highly opinionated (the worst combination) , you will drive their uninformed opinions underground if you don’t get in synch. Conversely, if you are willing to be challenged, and others behave the same way, you can demand that all critical communication be done openly.
Imagine if a group of us were trying to learn how to play golf with Tiger Woods, and he and a new golfer were debating how to swing the club. Would it be helpful or harmful to our progress to ignore their different track records and experience? Of course it would be harmful and plain silly to treat their points of view equally, because they have different levels of believability. It is better to listen to what Tiger Woods has to say, without constant interruptions by some know-nothing arguing with him. While I believe this is true, it would be most productive if Tiger Woods gave his instructions and then answered questions. However, because I’m pretty extreme in believing that it is important to obtain understanding rather than accepting doctrine at face value, I also think the new golfer shouldn’t accept what Tiger Woods has to say as right only because he has won loads of tournaments and has years of experience playing golf. In other words, I believe the new golfer shouldn’t stop questioning Tiger until he is confident he has found truth. At the same time, I also think the new golfer would be pretty dumb and arrogant to believe he’s probably right and the champion golfer is wrong. So he should approach his questioning with that perspective rather than overblown confidence. It would be really bad for the group’s learning if all the people in the group treated what the new golfer and Tiger Woods had to say as equally valuable. I feel exactly the same way about getting at truth at Bridgewater. While it’s good to be open-minded and questioning, it’s dumb to treat the views of people with great track records and experience the same as those without track records and experience.
29d) Leverage your communication. While open communication is very important, the challenge is figuring out how to do it in a time-efficient way. It is helpful to use leveraging techniques like open e-mails posted on a FAQ board. If the reporting ratios are organized as described in the principles on organizational design, there should be ample time for this. The challenges become greater the higher you go in the reporting hierarchy because the number of people affected by your actions and who have opinions and/or questions grows larger than just two reporting levels down. In such cases, you will need even greater leverage and prioritization (e.g., having some of the questions answered by a well -equipped party who works for you, asking people to prioritize their questions by urgency or importance, etc) .
... 30) Don’t treat all opinions as equally valuable. Almost everyone has an opinion, but many are worthless or harmful. The views of people without track records are not equal to the views of people with strong track records. Treating all people equally is more likely to lead away from truth than toward it. People without records of success who are nonetheless confident about how things should be done are either naïve or arrogant. In either case, they’re potentially dangerous to themselves and others. However, all views should be considered in an open-minded way, albeit placed in the proper context of experience and track record. Ultimately, the proof is in the pudding: can you handle your responsibilities well? As a general rule, if you can, then you can have an opinion of how to do it—if you can’t, you can’t.
... 30) 不是所有观点都具有同等价值。每个人都有观点，但是这其中有许多是毫无价值甚至是有害的。过往业绩为零的人的观点肯定无法与有优秀业绩的人相提并论。对所有人一视同仁只能离真相越来越远。那些既没有经验又夸夸其谈的人不是太天真就是过于自负。不论是哪种情况，他们对自己和他人而言都是潜在的危险因素。然而，在考虑了经验和过往业绩之后，还是应该对所有的观点都持开放的态度。实践出真知：你是否能承担自己的责任？这是一个通用的原则，如果你能，那说明你对如何做这件事有发言权，反之则没有。
30a) A hierarchy of merit is not only consistent with a meritocracy of ideas but essential for it. Not only is better decision-making enhanced, so is time management. It’s not possible for everyone to debate everything all the time and still get work done effectively.
... 31) Consider your own and others’ “believabilities.” By believability, I mean the probability that a person’s view will be right. While we can never know this precisely, we can roughly assess it according to the quality of a person’s reasoning and their track record. Of course, different people will have different views of their own and other’s believability, which is fine. Just recognize that this is a reality that is relevant in a number of ways. Ask, “Why should I believe you?” and “Why should I believe myself?”
... 31) 思考自己和别人的可信度。所谓可信度，就是某人观点正确的概率。可信度肯定无法做到精确评估，但你通过某人的逻辑思维能力和他的过往业绩可以看出个大概。当然，虽然不同人对自己以及他人的「可信度」评估有差异，这没关系，你只需认识到可信度的评估在很多方面都有参考价值。比如，你可以问“我为什么应该相信你呢？”以及“我为什么要相信我自己呢？”
31a) Ask yourself whether you have earned the right to have an opinion. As a general rule, if you have a demonstrated track record, then you can have an opinion of how to do it—if you don’t, you can’t, though you can have theories and questions.
31b) People who have repeatedly and successfully accomplished the thing in question and have great explanations when probed are most believable. Those with one of those two qualities are somewhat believable; people with neither are least believable.
At the same time, people’s ideas should always be assessed on their merit in order to encourage them to always think in an open-minded way. I have seen that inexperienced people can have great ideas, sometimes far better than more experienced people, though often much worse. So we must be attuned to both the good and the bad and allow people to build their own track records and their own level of believability. Because of Bridgewater’s radical openness, you can see how we make our assessments of that.
Someone new who doesn’t know much, has little believability, or isn’t confident in his views should ask questions. On the other hand, a highly believable person with experience and a good track record who is highly confident in his views should be assertive. Everyone should be upfront in expressing how confident they are in their thoughts. A suggestion should be called a suggestion; a firmly held conviction should be presented as such. Don’t make the mistake of being a dumb shit with a confident opinion.
31c) If someone asks you a question, think first whether you’re the responsible party/right person to be answering the question.
... 32) Spend lavishly on the time and energy you devote to “getting in synch” because it’s the best investment you can make. You will inevitably need to prioritize because of time constraints, but beware of the tremendous price of skimping on quality communication.
... 33) If it is your meeting to run, manage the conversation. There are many reasons why meetings go poorly, but frequently it is because of a lack of clarity about the topic or the level at which things are being discussed (e.g., the principle/machine level, the case at hand level, or the specific fact level) . To manage the meetings well:
... 33) 如果是你主持会议，请协调好会议中各方的讨论。 会议进行不顺利的原因有很多，但是最常碰到的问题就是主题不明确，讨论问题的层次不清晰。比如，要分清哪些问题是原则和机制层面的，哪些是手头待处理的问题，哪些是具体的事实问题。让会议顺利进行，要做到以下几点：
33a) Make it clear who the meeting is meant to serve and who is directing the meeting.Every meeting is for the purpose of meeting someone’s goals; that person is the responsible party for the meeting and decides what s/he wants to get out of it and how s/he will do so. Meetings without a clear responsible party run a high risk of being directionless and unproductive.
33b) Make clear what type of communication you are going to have in light of the objectives and priorities. For example, if the goal of the meeting is to have people with different opinions work through their differences to try to get closer to what is true and what to do about it (i.e., open-minded debate) , you will run it differently than if the meeting is meant to educate. Debating issues takes time. That time increases geometrically depending on the number of people participating in the discussion, so you have to carefully choose the right people in the right numbers to suit the decision that needs to be made. In any discussion try to limit the participation to those whom you value most in light of your objectives. The worst way to pick people is based on whether their conclusions align with yours.
33c) Lead the discussion by being assertive and open-minded. Group-think and solo-think are both dangerous.
33c) 主持讨论要坚定自信，开诚布公。 集体思维或孤立思维都是危险的。
33d) A small group (3 to 5) of smart, conceptual people seeking the right answers in an open- minded way will generally lead to the best answer. Next best is to have decisions made by a single smart, conceptual decision-maker, but this is a much worse choice than the former. The worst way to make decisions is via large groups without a smart, conceptual leader. Almost everyone thinks they’re smart and conceptual, but only a small percentage of any group really is. Even when there is a large number of smart, conceptual leaders, more than five trying to make a decision is very inefficient and difficult. This is especially the case when people think they need to satisfy everyone.
33d) 组织三至五人的小组讨论，邀请思维灵活、概念清晰的成员开放地寻求最佳方案，这种情况一般能取得最好的效果。 次之，可以让一个聪明的决策者来做决定，但这一方案要比前者效果差很多。最糟糕的方式是在没有任何一个聪明的领导者领导的情况下，让一大群人来做决定。几乎每个人都认为自己既聪明又概念清晰，但是事实上每个团队中只有极少数人是这样的。即便是有一大群明智又有远见的领导者在一起，超过五个人的决策也将是十分低效与艰难的。即便是有一大群明智又有远见的领导者在一起，当人数超过 5 个人的时候，决策的产生也将是十分低效与艰难的。特别是人们还想做出让每个人都满意的决策下更是如此。
33e) 1+1=3. Two people who collaborate well will be about three times as effective as the two of them operating independently because they will see what the other might miss, they can leverage each other, and they can hold each other to higher standards. This symbiotic relationship of adding people to a group will have incremental benefits (2+1=4.25) up to a point at which there are no incremental gains and beyond which adding people produces incremental losses in effectiveness. That is because 1) the marginal benefits diminish as the group gets larger—e.g. two or three people might be able to cover most of the important perspectives so adding more people doesn't bring much more, and 2) larger group interactions are less efficient than smaller group interactions. Of course, what's best in practice is a function of 1) the quality of the people and the differences of the perspectives that they bring and 2) how well the group is managed. As noted before, each group should have someone who is responsible for managing the flow to get out of the meeting the most possible.
33e) 1+1=3. 两个合作无间的人的效率是两个各自为阵的人的三倍，因为前者能够看到彼此的疏漏，取长补短，将彼此都提升到一个新高度。这种增加人手的共生关系是具有增量效应的，2+1=4.25，直到一个临界点，增加人手不再产生增量效应，却开始影响效率。这种现象是因为：1）随着团队人数的增多，将产生边际效应。比如说，两三个人也许已经足以涵盖最重要的视角了，那么增加更多的人并不会带来更明显的收益；2）人数多的团队互动要比小团队互动效率更低。当然，实践中最佳模式是将参会人员的质量和不同视角与团队管理相结合的。如前所述，每一个团队都必须要有一个负责人来协调整个会议的流程，确保会议成效。
33f) Navigate the levels of the conversation clearly. When considering an issue or situation, there should be two levels of discussion: the case at hand and the relevant principles that help you decide how the machine should work. Since the case at hand is a manifestation of one or more relevant principles, you need to clearly navigate between these levels in order to 1) handle the case well, 2) improve the machine so that future cases like this will be handled better in the future, and 3) test the effectiveness of your principles.
33f) 确保对事件沟通层次的清晰。 在讨论某个问题或情势时，需要进行两个层级的讨论：手边的案件以及相关可以帮助决定机制如何运作的原则。相关的案件可能涉及一个或多个原则，你需要为不同层次之间设定明确的方向。以此确保：1）正确处理案件；2）改进机制使未来类似案件能得以顺利解决；3) 检验你的原则是否有效。
33g) Watch out for “topic slip.” Topic slip is the random and inconclusive drifting from topic to topic without achieving completion. Tip: Avoid topic slip by tracking the conversation on a whiteboard so everyone can see where you are.
33g) 谨防讨论偏题。 偏题是指偏离主题的、任意的、无结论、没完没了的讨论。提示：为防止跑题，可使用白板记录对话，以便所有人都能注意到讨论进度。
33h) Enforce the logic of conversations. There is a tendency for people’s emotions to heat up when there is a disagreement, so focusing on the logic of your exchange will facilitate communication. If you are calm and analytical in listening to others’ points of view, it is more difficult for them to shut down a logical exchange than if you get emotional or allow them to get emotional. 33h) 增强沟通的逻辑性。当出现分歧的时候，人们总是容易情绪激动，此时，注重交流的逻辑性能够促进沟通。在听取对方观点时，如果你能够冷静进行分析，那么对方更容易进行有逻辑的交流，这种交流要比你或者对方情绪激动时高效得多。
33i) Worry about substance more than style. This is not to say that some styles aren’t more effective than others with different people and in different circumstances, but don’t let style or tone prevent you from getting in synch. I often see people complain about the delivery of a criticism in order to deflect from its substance. If you think someone’s style is an issue, box it as a separate issue to get in synch about (start by asking whether it’s true and whether it’s important) .
33i) 实质内容比形式更重要。 当然，不同的人在不同的情况下适用某些形式会比适用另一些形式效率更高。但是，不要让形式或风格限制了你们达成一致的步伐。我经常听到人们为了扯开话题而对批评的形式进行抱怨。如果你对某人的表述风格有意见，那么你应该单独就此问题争取达成一致， 比如可以问一下此人的表述风格是否是其真实情绪的流露，以及这种表述形式对于沟通而言是否真的重要等。
33j) Achieve completion in conversations. The main purpose of discussion is to achieve completion and get in synch, which leads to decisions and or actions. Conversations often fail to reach completion. This amounts to a waste of time because they don’t result in conclusions or productive actions. When there is an exchange of ideas, especially if there is a disagreement, it is important to end it by stating the conclusions. If there is agreement, say it; if not, say that. Where further action has been decided, get those tasks on a to-do list, assign people to do them, and specify due dates. Write down your conclusions, working theories, and to-do’s in places that will lead to their being used as foundations for continued progress.
33j) 在讨论中要得出一定结论。 讨论的主要目的就是要解决问题，达成一致，从而做出决断，付诸行动。讨论经常得不到完结，这完全是浪费时间，因为这种讨论无法得到任何结论，也无法转化成有价值的行动。当大家交换观点的时候，尤其是当有分歧出现的时候，必须要得出结论作出了断。如果能够达成一致，这就是结论，如果无法达成一致，这也是一种结论。如果决定进行下一步行动，就要将这些任务添加到待完成事项列表之中，分配人手来完成，制定截止日期。记录下得出的结论、工作理论以及待完成事项，使他们能够为取得持续进展打下坚实基础。
33k) Have someone assigned to maintain notes in meetings and make sure follow-through happens. Generally speaking, to avoid distraction during the discussion itself, prioritizing follow-ups and assignments should be done afterwards.
33l) Be careful not to lose personal responsibility via group decision-making. Too often groups will make a decision to do something without assigning personal responsibilities so it is not clear who is supposed to do what. Be clear in assigning personal responsibilities.
... 34) Make sure people don’t confuse their right to complain, give advice, and debate with the right to make decisions. Discussion does not mean rule by referendum. While our culture is marked by extreme openness, some people mistakenly assume we have group decision-making in which all views are treated equally and consensus rules. Since not all views are equally valuable, I don’t believe in consensus decision-making or referendums. We operate not only by open debate but also by clearly assigning personal responsibility to specific people. While these two values might seem at odds, personal responsibility and open debate work together to synthesize effective decision-making at Bridgewater. Everyone does not report to everyone here. Instead, responsibility and authority are assigned to individuals based on our assessment of their ability to handle them. I want the most capable individuals assigned to each job. We hold them accountable for their outcomes, but we also give them the authority to achieve those outcomes. It is perfectly okay for a responsible party to carry through a decision he thinks is best even when others who are knowledgeable disagree, although this disagreement should be considered and weighed seriously. We have, and should have, an explicit decision-making hierarchy, ideally based on merit.
... 34) 不要将控诉、献言献策、辩论的权利同抉择权混为一谈。讨论并不意味着要通过全体投票来做决定。我们有着极其坦诚的文化，但是有些人错误地认为我们是进行集体决策的，所有的观点都被一视同仁，所有问题必须一致通过。我们并不会给所有的观点赋予同等重视，我不赞成一致通过决策或全体投票。我们的运作模式不仅包括自由辩论，还包括将责任分配到个人。二者可能看起来是冲突的，但是个人责任与自由辩论在桥水联合基金得到了很好的结合，共同促进了高效决策。我们不要求每个人向所有人汇报，与此相反，我们根据对个人能力的评估，将责任与权力都分配给了个人。我需要所有人各司其职，他们对自己做出的成绩负责，当然我们也赋予他们完成任务的权力。如果负责人试图做出一个自认为最佳的决定，而其他知情者持否定意见，负责人完全可以坚持做出自己的决定。当然，该反对意见也应该得到严肃的考量。我们拥有，也应该拥有一个明确的决策层级，理想状态下，这一层级应该是以个人能力为基础的
... 35) Recognize that getting in synch is a two-way responsibility. In any conversation there is a responsibility to transmit and a responsibility to receive. Misinterpretations are going to take place. Often, difficulty in communication is due to people having different ways of thinking (e.g., left- brained thinkers talking to right-brained thinkers) . The parties involved should 1) realize that what they might be transmitting or receiving might not be what was meant, 2) consider multiple possibilities, and 3) do a back and forth so that they can get in synch. People do the opposite — confidently thinking that they’ve communicated their intent clearly, not considering multiple possibilities and then blaming the other parties for the misunderstanding. Learn lessons from your problems in communications to improve.
... 35) 要认识到，达成意见统一是双向责任。 沟通过程中，既有交付的责任，也有接受的责任——在这个过程中一定会出现误解。一般而言，沟通障碍主要是因为人们的思维方式不同。比如，当左脑思维者试图与右脑思维者进行沟通时，就会出现障碍。相关方应该：1）要认识到他们对交付或接受到的信息的认知偏差并非出于本意；2）考虑多重可能性；3）反复之前步骤，以达成意见统一。而人们往往不这样做，大家总是自信他们将自己的意图明确地表达出来了，然后责备对方理解失误。我们需要从自己沟通问题中学习，不断提高。
... 36) Escalate if you can’t get in synch. If you can’t understand or reconcile points of view with someone else, agree on a third party to provide guidance. This person could be your manager or another agreed- upon, believable person or group who can resolve the conflict objectively, fairly, and sensibly. This mechanism is a key element of our culture and crucial for maintaining a meritocracy of ideas.
... 36) 如果意见无法统一，提交上一级进行讨论。如果你无法理解，也无法与他人达成意见一致，那么就应该统一让第三方来提供一些指导。第三方可以是你的管理者、其他约定方、权威人士或团体，此人需要能够客观、公平、合理的处理纠纷。该机制是我们文化中关键的一环，对于维持观点至上的原则至关重要。
In fact, I once toyed with the possibility of developing a voting system based on a believability matrix. Though that might not be possible for practical reasons, it suggests the merit-based decision-making we aspire toward with our current process. The challenging and probing we encourage are not meant to second-guess every decision but to help us assess the quality of our work over time.
To Get the People Right…
...37) Recognize the Most Important Decisions You Make Are Who You Choose to Be Your Responsible Party
... 38) Remember that almost everything good comes from having great people operating in a great culture. I cannot emphasize strongly enough how important the selection, training, testing, evaluation, and sorting out of people is. If you put the goals and the tasks in the hands of people who can do them well, and if you make crystal clear that they are personally responsible for achieving the goals and doing the tasks, they should produce excellent results. This section is about the people part of the feedback loop process, diagramed below.
... 38) 要记住，几乎所有的成功都是来自因为优秀的文化以及在其中工作的优秀的人才。人才的挑选、培训、评估、分类，无论如何强调都不为过。如果你将目标和任务置于称职的人手中，而且明确表示他们个人对于完成目标任务负责，那么他们将作出骄人的成绩。该章节将讲述下图中反馈循环流程中人员的环节。
... 39) First, match the person to the design. Understand what attributes matter most for a job, and then ascertain whether an individual has them. This matching process requires 1) visualizing the job and the qualities needed to do it well and then 2) ascertaining if the individual has those qualities.
... 39) 首先，要选择合适的人参与机构设置。 首先要看清某职位描述所应包含的最重要的能力，然后确定某人是否具有这些特质。删选过程需要做到：1）将职位和所需具备的特质明确表达出来；2）确认某人是否具备这些特质。
Look for believable responsible parties who love producing great results. Remember that values are most important—e.g., if “work” is what people have to do to make money, I don’t want people to “work” here. I only want people at Bridgewater who are joining us on an important, shared mission to do great things.
The thing that I like least (or dislike most) about my job is fighting to maintain standards, but it must be done. I know that the only way for me to succeed and to be happy is to have good people do it for me, which means that I have to hire, train, and sort out people. It is futile to give responsibilities to people who do not have the qualities required to succeed. It frustrates, and inevitably angers, all parties, which is subversive to the environment. So, hiring, training, and sorting out people so that responsibilities are placed in the hands of people who can be trusted to do an excellent job is the only viable path, and is extremely satisfying.
39a) Most importantly, find people who share your values. At Bridgewater, those key values are a drive for excellence, truth at all costs, a high sense of ownership, and strong character (by character, I mean the willingness to do the good but difficult things) .
39a) 最为重要的是要找同你价值观一致的人。 在桥水，这些核心价值观就是追求卓越，不惜一切代价探寻真相，强烈的归属感，意志坚定，即愿意去做正确但艰难的事情。
39b) Look for people who are willing to look at themselves objectively and have character. These are not natural talents—they are qualities that anyone can acquire. They are also the qualities that have the biggest influence on whether or not I respect someone. They are essential for success.
39c) Conceptual thinking and common sense are required in order to assign someone the responsibility for achieving goals (as distinct from tasks) .
... 40) Recognize that the inevitable responsible party is the person who bears the consequences of what is done. Because of this, the RP must choose wisely when delegating responsibilities to others, and he must incentivize and manage them appropriately. There is no escaping that. For example, you are the inevitable RP for taking care of your health because you’re the one who inevitably bears the consequences. If you’re sick, you might choose to delegate the responsibility of figuring out what do to about it to a doctor. However, it is your responsibility to pick the right doctor because you will bear the consequences of that decision. While it is, of course, also the doctor’s responsibility to handle the responsibilities that you delegate to him, you still need to make sure that his incentives are aligned with his responsibilities and that he is doing his job well. The inevitable responsible party can’t delegate all his responsibilities away and expect good outcomes, even in cases in which he has no expertise. So you can’t escape hiring and managing properly.
... 40) 必然负责人是需要承担一切后果的。正因为如此，负责人在委派责任时，应该谨慎斟酌人选。终极责任人需要在激励与管理中获得不断平衡，同时要管理好这些任务，这是其无法逃避的责任。你是自己健康的必然负责人，因为健康受损后你必然会承受相应后果。如果你病了，你可以将寻求方案的责任委派给医生。然而，你依然需要负责挑选一个正确的医生，因为这一决定的后果还是会影响你。当然，医生有责任处理好你委派给他的责任。但是你依然需要确保你给医生的物质刺激与给他的责任相符， 确保他认真完成工作。必然负责人无法将自己所有的责任都委派给别人，同时期待有好的结果，即便是他毫无专长的领域也是这样。所以，你依然无法逃避合理雇佣和管理的责任。
... 41) By and large, you will get what you deserve over time. The results that you end up with will reflect how you and your people learn to handle things. So take control of your situation and hold yourself and others accountable for producing great results. People who wish for a great result but are unwilling to do what it takes to get there will fail.
... 41) 总的来说，日积月累，你就会得到你想要的。你所获得的成果将反映你与你的团队是如何学习处理任务的。因此，请把握局势，让你与团队其他人对获得成果负责。那些眼高手低的人，注定一败涂地。
... 42) The most important responsible parties are those who are most responsible for the goals, outcomes, and machines (they are those higher in the pyramid) . Give me someone who can effectively be responsible for an area—i.e., who can design, hire, and sort to achieve the goal, and I can be comfortable about all that is in that area. Therefore, they are the most important people to choose and manage well.
... 42) 最重要的负责人要为目标、结果和组织机构负主要责任（即位于金字塔上层的人）。如果我有某个能够有效负责某领域的人，他可以执行规划、雇佣、分类以实现目标，那么我会对该领域十分放心。因此，任用好和管理好这群人才是最重要的。
... 43) Choose those who understand the difference between goals and tasks to run things. Otherwise you will have to do their jobs for them. The ability to see and value goals is largely innate, though it improves with experience. It can be tested for, though no tests are perfect.
... 43) 选择那些明白“目标”与“任务”之间差异的人来做事。 否则你就必须替他们完成他们的工作。 清楚认识并珍视目标是一种天生的能力，也会随着经验的增多而提升。该能力能够被测试，但是测试并不完美。
... 44) Recognize that People Are Built Very Differently
... 44) 要知道每个人都生而不同
... 45) Think about their very different values, abilities, and skills. Values are the deep-seated beliefs that motivate behaviors; people will fight for their values, and values determine people’s compatibility with others. Abilities are ways of thinking and behaving. Some people are great learners and fast processors; others possess common sense; still others think creatively or logically or with supreme organization, etc. Skills are learned tools, such as being able to speak a foreign language or write computer code.
... 45) 思考他们在价值观、能力和技能上的差异。价值观即推动行为的深层信仰。人们会为价值观而奋斗，价值观决定了人们与他人相处的模式。能力是人们思考与行为的方式。有些人学习能力强，能够快速处理问题，有些人有丰富的常识，也有人拥有创新思维、逻辑思维，或者有优秀的组织能力。技能则是指学会使用的工具，比如说一门外语，编写计算机程序等。
While values and abilities are unlikely to change much, most skills can be acquired in a limited amount of time (e.g., most master’s degrees can be acquired in two years) and often change in worth (e.g., today’s best programming language can be obsolete in a few years) .
It is important for you to know what mix of qualities is important to fit each role and, more broadly, with whom you can have successful relationships. In picking people for long-term relationships, values are most important, abilities come next, and skills are the least important.
... 46) Understand what each person who works for you is like so that you know what to expect from them.
... 46) 要了解你每个员工的情况，才能知道你能从他们身上有何种期待。
... 47) Recognize that the type of person you fit in the job must match the requirements for that job.
... 47) 岗位用人要与职位要求相匹配。